Research Project Title

Presenter Information

Faculty Sponsor

Julia Stronks, Whitworth University

Research Project Abstract

This paper examines the constitutional legality of the required provision of contraceptives under the Affordable Care Act. It discusses the implications and nuances of Zubik v. Burwell, the lawsuit slated to appear before the Supreme Court in March, which sets religious freedom against governmental regulations of the Affordable Care Act and contraceptive rights. The issue to be decided is whether or not the accommodation scheme that was created for religious employers in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby is an acceptable alternative which lessens the burden on the religious exercise of non-profit organizations as well as for-profit companies. The paper discusses the background of the case, the precedent, including district and appellate court rulings, and concludes with original research leading to predictions regarding how the current justices will vote based on their individual ideologies and prior decisions.

Session Number

RS11

Location

Robinson 141

Abstract Number

RS11-d

This document is currently not available here.

DOWNLOADS

Since April 01, 2016

COinS

Apr 23rd, 3:15 PMApr 23rd, 4:45 PM

The Constitutionality of Contraceptives

Robinson 141

This paper examines the constitutional legality of the required provision of contraceptives under the Affordable Care Act. It discusses the implications and nuances of Zubik v. Burwell, the lawsuit slated to appear before the Supreme Court in March, which sets religious freedom against governmental regulations of the Affordable Care Act and contraceptive rights. The issue to be decided is whether or not the accommodation scheme that was created for religious employers in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby is an acceptable alternative which lessens the burden on the religious exercise of non-profit organizations as well as for-profit companies. The paper discusses the background of the case, the precedent, including district and appellate court rulings, and concludes with original research leading to predictions regarding how the current justices will vote based on their individual ideologies and prior decisions.